[Rhodes22-list] And now for a little Politics - Run Fred, Run!

[Brad Haslett]

Missed the GOP debate.  A sinus infection has had me down for the week and
there wasn't a single candidate in it that I gave Jack Schitt about (sorry
Ed.)  Fred is running, and he'll run for President the same way he ran for
the Senate in Tennessee - his way.  Here is his latest speech. Wally, very
little here about Iraq other than it is a divisive issue.

Brad

-----------------

May 04, 2007
Excerpt: Prepared Remarks for Speech to Lincoln Club Annual Dinner

*Delivered in Orange County, California, Friday, May 4, 2007*

So we meet again, and I'm honored, because I know we're here for the same
reasons: Love of our country and concern for our future.

A lot of Americans have these concerns tonight. They are concerned about the
way things are going in our country right now. Some fear we may be in the
first stages of decline. We've heard this malaise talk before.

Of course Iraq is a large part of it. Not only is it tough going, but the
effort is besieged on all sides. From those playing the most crass kind of
politics with it at home to criticism from around the world.

Even at home, as we enjoy the benefits from one of the best economies we've
ever had, people seem uncertain; they raise concerns about global
competition or a growing economic disparity among our citizens.

These are challenges. But how we react to them is more important than the
challenges themselves. Some want us, to the extent possible, to withdraw
from the world that presents us with so many problems, in the hope they will
go away. Some would push us towards protectionist trade policies. Others see
a solution in raising taxes and redistributing the income among our
citizens.

Wrong on all counts. These are defensive, defeatist policies that have
consistently been proven wrong. They are not what America is all about.

Let's talk about the issues here at home, first. A lot of folks in
Washington suffer from a big misconception about our economy. They confuse
the well-being of our government with the wealth of our nation. Adam Smith
pointed out the same problem in his day, when many governments mixed up how
much money the king had with how well-off the country was.

Taxes are necessary. But they don't make the country any better off. At best
they simply move money from the private sector to the government. But taxes
are also a burden on production, because they discourage people from
working, saving, investing, and taking risks. Some economists have
calculated that today each additional dollar collected by the government, by
raising income-tax rates, makes the private sector as much as two dollars
worse off.

To me this means one simple thing: tax rates should be as low as possible.
This isn't anything ideological, and it really isn't some great insight.
It's common sense arithmetic.

That's why the economy booms when taxes are cut. When the Kennedy tax cuts
were passed in the 1960s, the economy boomed. When Reagan cut taxes in 1981,
we went from economic malaise to a new morning in America. And when George
Bush cut taxes in 2001, he took a declining economy he inherited to an
economic expansion -- despite 9-11, the NASDAQ bubble and corporate
scandals.

The Democrats, of course, want to raise taxes. They only want to target the
rich, they say. A word of advice to anyone in the middle class -- don't
stand anywhere near that target. Wouldn't it be great if, instead of
worrying so much about how to divide the pie, we could work together on how
to make the pie bigger?

On globalization -- we're not afraid of it. It works to our benefit. We
innovate more and invest in that innovation better than anywhere else in the
world. Same thing goes for services, which are increasingly driving our
economy. Free trade and market economies have done more for freedom and
prosperity than a central planner could ever dream and we're the world's
best example of that. So, why do we want to take investment dollars out of
growth, and invest it in government?

I'd say cash flow to the government is already going quite well. Over the
past year our current tax structure generated record levels of revenue for
Washington. In fact it's time to seriously consider what we're getting for
our "investment" in government.

For many years, several functions of the federal government have been
descending into a sorry state of mismanagement and lack of accountability. I
published a 68-page report on government's waste, duplication and inability
to carry out some of its basic responsibilities. That was back in 2001
before 9-11, and it got little attention. Now the government's shortcomings
are affecting our national security and are getting a lot of attention.

The growth of government is not solving these problems; it's causing a lot
of them. Every level of new bureaucracy that is created develops a level of
bureaucracy beneath it, which creates another one. Pretty soon there is no
accountability in the system. A new head of a department or agency comes in
from out of town and, after a protracted confirmation fight, wants to spend
his or her few years in Washington making great policy and solving national
problems, not fighting with their own bureaucrats. So they just let well
enough alone. Then you start seeing the results. Departments that can't pass
an audit, computer systems that don't work, intelligence breakdowns, people
in over their heads.

Yet people in both parties continue to try to federalize and regulate at the
national level more and more aspects of American society -- things that have
traditionally been handled at the state and local level. We must remember
that we have states to serve as policy laboratories for innovation and
competition. That's how we got welfare reform. Our system also allows for
the diversity of our large country. Our attitude should be, let the federal
government do what it is supposed to be doing -- competently. Then maybe we
will give it something else to do.

The government could start by securing our nation's borders. A sovereign
nation that can't do that is not a sovereign nation. This is secondarily an
immigration issue. It's primarily a national security issue. We were told
twenty years ago if we produced a comprehensive solution, we'd solve the
illegal immigration problem. Twelve million illegals later, we're being told
that same thing again. I don't believe most Americans are as concerned about
the 12 million that are here as they are about the next 12 million and the
next 12 million after that. I think they're thinking: "Prove you can secure
the border and then people of good will can sit down and work out the rest
of it, while protecting those folks who play by the rules."

Speaking of reforms and our economy, there is nothing more urgent than the
fate that is awaiting our Social Security and Medicare programs. The good
news is that we are living longer. However, we don't have enough young
working people to finance these programs from their taxes.

People say the programs are going bankrupt. They won't go bankrupt. Even as
these programs sap every dime of the government's revenue, the folks in
Washington will raise the taxes necessary to cover the problem. At this rate
the federal government is going to wind up as nothing more than a transfer
agent -- transferring wealth from one generation to another. It will
devastate our economy.

Sometimes I think that I'm the last guy around who still thinks term limits
is a good idea. The professionalization of politics saps people's courage.
Their desire to keep their job and not upset anybody overrides all else --
even if it hurts the country.

So the entitlement problem gets kicked a little further down the road. This
action is based on the premise that our generation is too greedy to help the
next generation. I believe just the opposite is true. If grandmom and
granddad think that a little sacrifice will help their grandchildren when
they get married, try to buy a home or have children, they will respond to a
credible call to make that sacrifice -- if they don't think that the
sacrifice is going down some government black hole.

I am going to quote my friend, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. I don't think
he'll mind, even though it was a private conversation. He said, "People talk
a lot about moral issues, but the greatest moral issue facing our generation
is the fact that we are bankrupting the next generation. People talk about
wanting to make a difference. Here we could make a difference for
generations to come."

It's clear with close numbers in the House and the Senate we need
bipartisanship to have any chance at real reform in any of these areas. And
there are many responsible people who are willing to try to make it happen.
But the level of bipartisanship needed for real progress can only be
achieved when politicians perceive that the American people are demanding
it. That's why leaders of reform and hopefully our next President, will have
a mandate to go directly to the American people with truth and clarity.

These days in Washington, there's an awful lot of talk about the need for
conversation -- that we should talk more to our nation's enemies; that we
should speak "truth to power." However the speakers are usually turned in
the wrong direction. Instead of talking to each other, leaders need to be
speaking more to the American people.

The message would be simple: "My friends we have entered a new era. We are
going to be tested in many ways, possibly under attack and for a long time.
It's time to take stock and be honest with ourselves. We're going to have to
do a lot of things better. Here's what we need to do and here's why. I know
that, now that you're being called upon, you will do whatever is necessary
for the sake of our country and for future generations. You always have."

When the American people respond to that, as I know they will, you will have
your bipartisanship.


posted by Fred Dalton Thompson on 5/4/2007 3:41:40 PM